<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 09:00, Roberto De Ioris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:roberto@unbit.it">roberto@unbit.it</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im"><br>
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Roberto De Ioris <<a href="mailto:roberto@unbit.it">roberto@unbit.it</a>><br>
> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Sorry, i think for this purpose it is betetr to use<br>
>> r->start_sec instead of time(NULL).<br>
>><br>
>> What do you think about it ?<br>
> When I made the same patch nearly 2 years ago, I used<br>
> ngx_cached_time->sec.<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div>I would like to have (with the most possible accuracy) the time<br>
when the request starts. (this will allow to reliably calculate<br>
overload problems)<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; border-collapse: collapse; ">ngx_cached_time try to update every main loop.</span></div><div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
ngx_cached_time->sec can be different (oh yes we are talking about<br>
milliseconds, but why not maintaining accuracy :) )<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>but as unixtime you mean unix timestamp?</div></div><br>-- <br><div>wbr, Kirill</div><br>